Chomskian linguistics and human uniqueness

[ronbutters at AOL.COM]

Generally, science involves worrying about truth rather than being offended by the arrogance of the or unsubstantiated suspicions about the motives of the scientist.
------Original Message------
From: Joel S. Berson
Sender: ADS-L
To: ADS-L
ReplyTo: ADS-L
Subject: Re: [ADS-L] Chomskian linguistics and human uniqueness
Sent: Sep 9, 2010 7:58 PM

At 9/9/2010 04:58 PM, Ronald Butters wrote:
>Chomsky would say that they are all restatements of each other, and,
>in turn, restatements of his work, if they are any good.

I'm sure he would.  That's why I would be quite happy to see
Chomskian linguistics gone out of favor.  :-)

I have no knowledge of this subject.  But that humans are hard-wired
for language, and other primates not, I am very skeptical of.  (I
don't know if Chomsky makes the second claim.)  It strikes me as the
dying gasp of "scientists" who need to see humans as unique because
of one single biologically-established capability that they have all
of and other primates none of.  I am also suspicious about assertions
that something or other is hard-wired in the human brain, considering
its demonstrated great capacity for accommodation (in particular, in
the brain-damaged).

Joel

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org


Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org